EUROPEAN ORGANIZATION FOR NUCLEAR RESEARCH (CERN) CERN-PH-EP/2013-204 2018/11/05 CMS-EXO-12-049 Searches for light- and heavy-flavour three-jet resonances in pp collisions at √ s = 8 TeV The CMS Collaboration * Abstract A search for three-jet hadronic resonance production in pp collisions at a centre-of- mass energy of 8TeV has been conducted by the CMS Collaboration at the LHC with a data sample corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 19.4 fb -1 . The search method is model independent, and events are selected that have high jet multiplic- ity and large values of jet transverse momenta. The signal models explored assume R-parity-violating supersymmetric gluino pair production and have final states with either only light-flavour jets or both light- and heavy-flavour jets. No significant devi- ation is found between the selected events and the expected standard model multijet and t t background. For a gluino decaying into light-flavour jets, a lower limit of 650 GeV on the gluino mass is set at a 95% confidence level, and for a gluino decaying into one heavy- and two light-flavour jets, gluino masses between 200 and 835 GeV are, for the first time, likewise excluded. Published in Physics Letters B as doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2014.01.049. c 2018 CERN for the benefit of the CMS Collaboration. CC-BY-3.0 license * See Appendix A for the list of collaboration members arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014
Transcript
EUROPEAN ORGANIZATION FOR NUCLEAR RESEARCH (CERN)
CERN-PH-EP/2013-2042018/11/05
CMS-EXO-12-049
Searches for light- and heavy-flavour three-jet resonancesin pp collisions at
√s = 8 TeV
The CMS Collaboration∗
Abstract
A search for three-jet hadronic resonance production in pp collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 8 TeV has been conducted by the CMS Collaboration at the LHC witha data sample corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 19.4 fb−1. The searchmethod is model independent, and events are selected that have high jet multiplic-ity and large values of jet transverse momenta. The signal models explored assumeR-parity-violating supersymmetric gluino pair production and have final states witheither only light-flavour jets or both light- and heavy-flavour jets. No significant devi-ation is found between the selected events and the expected standard model multijetand tt background. For a gluino decaying into light-flavour jets, a lower limit of650 GeV on the gluino mass is set at a 95% confidence level, and for a gluino decayinginto one heavy- and two light-flavour jets, gluino masses between 200 and 835 GeVare, for the first time, likewise excluded.
Published in Physics Letters B as doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2014.01.049.
1 IntroductionHadronic multijet final states at hadron colliders offer a unique window on many possibleextensions of the standard model (SM), although with the view partly obscured by large back-grounds due to SM processes. Many of these extensions predict resonances, such as heavycoloured fermions transforming as octets under SU(3)c [1–4] or supersymmetric gluinos thatundergo R-parity-violating (RPV) decays to three quarks [5–7]. Recent studies from the Fermi-lab Tevatron Collider and the CERN Large Hadron Collider (LHC) employed the jet-ensembletechnique. For this technique, jets are associated into unique combinations of three jets (triplets).Additional selection requirements are imposed to suppress the large backgrounds due to SMprocesses and to enhance sensitivity to strongly decaying resonances. These analyses set lowermass limits based upon resonance fits for gluinos undergoing RPV decays. The CDF collabo-ration at the Tevatron excluded gluino masses below 144 GeV [8] using data from pp collisionsat 1.96 TeV, while the CMS collaboration at the LHC excluded masses below 460 GeV [9, 10]with data from pp collisions at 7 TeV. An additional search at the LHC by the ATLAS collab-oration, also based on data collected with pp collisions at 7 TeV, has extended these limits to666 GeV [11].
Presented here are the results of dedicated searches for pair-produced three-jet resonancesin multijet events from pp collisions, with one search being inclusive with respect to partonflavours and the second requiring at least one jet from the resonance decay to be identified as abottom-quark jet (b jet). This latter, heavy-flavour search is the first of its kind and probes ad-ditional RPV couplings. The results are based on a data sample of pp collisions at
√s = 8 TeV,
corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 19.4± 0.5 fb−1 [12] collected with the CMS detec-tor [13] at the LHC in 2012. Events with at least six jets, each with high transverse momentum(pT) with respect to the beam direction, are selected and investigated for evidence of three-jet resonances consistent with strongly coupled supersymmetric particle decays. The eventselection criteria are optimised in the context of the gluino signal mentioned above [5–7], us-ing a simplified model where the gluinos decay with a branching fraction of 100% to quarkjets. However, the generic features of the selection criteria provide a model-independent basisthat can be used when examining extensions of the SM, since any exotic three-jet resonancewith a narrow width, sufficient cross section, and high-pT jets would be expected to producea significant bump on the smoothly falling SM background of our search. Additionally, lowtrigger thresholds and the application of b-jet identification make it possible to use SM topquark-antiquark (tt) events to validate the analysis techniques.
2 The CMS experimentThe central feature of the CMS apparatus [13] is a superconducting solenoid of 6 m internaldiameter, providing a magnetic field of 3.8 T. Within the superconducting solenoid volume area silicon pixel and strip tracker, a lead tungstate electromagnetic calorimeter (ECAL), and ahadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters.Muons are measured in gas ionisation detectors embedded in the steel return yoke outside thesolenoid. Extensive forward calorimetry complements the coverage provided by the barrel andendcap detectors. CMS uses a right-handed coordinate system, with the origin at the nominalinteraction point, the x axis pointing to the centre of the LHC, the y axis pointing up (perpen-dicular to the LHC plane), and the z axis along the anticlockwise-beam direction. The polarangle θ is measured with respect to the positive z axis, the azimuthal angle φ is measured inthe x-y plane, and the pseudorapidity η is defined as η = − ln[tan(θ/2)]. Energy deposits fromhadronic jets are measured using the ECAL and HCAL. The energy resolution for photons with
2 3 Signal event simulation
ET ≈ 60 GeV varies between 1.1% and 2.6% over the solid angle of the ECAL barrel, and from2.2% to 5% in the endcaps. The HCAL, when combined with the ECAL, measures jets with aresolution ∆E/E ≈ 100%/
√E [GeV]⊕ 5% [14]. The ECAL provides coverage in pseudorapid-
ity |η| < 1.479 in a barrel region and 1.479 < |η| < 3.0 in two endcap regions. In the region|η| < 1.74, the HCAL cells have widths of 0.087 in η and 0.087 in φ. In the η-φ plane, and for|η| < 1.48, the HCAL cells map on to 5× 5 ECAL crystals arrays to form calorimeter towersprojecting radially outwards from close to the nominal interaction point. At larger values of |η|,the size of the towers increases, and the matching ECAL arrays contain fewer crystals. Withineach tower, the energy deposits in ECAL and HCAL cells are summed to define the calorimetertower energies, subsequently used to provide the energies and directions of hadronic jets.
The CMS detector uses a two-tier trigger system to collect data. Events satisfying the require-ments at the first level are passed to the high-level trigger (HLT), whose output is recorded andlimited to a total rate of ∼350 Hz. An HLT requirement based on at least six jets, reconstructedwith only calorimeter information, is used to select events. With the jets ordered in descendingpT values, the pT threshold at the HLT for the fourth jet is 60 GeV and, for the sixth jet, 20 GeV.For events passing all offline requirements described in Section 4, the total trigger efficiency isat least 99%.
The CMS particle-flow algorithm [15] combines calorimeter information with reconstructedtracks to identify individual particles such as photons, leptons, and neutral and charged hadrons.The photon energy is obtained directly from calibrated measurements in the ECAL. The en-ergy of electrons is determined from a combination of the track momentum at the primaryinteraction vertex [16], the corresponding ECAL cluster energy, and the energy sum of allbremsstrahlung photons associated with the track in the offline reconstruction. The muon en-ergy is obtained from the corresponding track momentum. The energy for a charged hadron isdetermined from a combination of the track momentum and the corresponding ECAL andHCAL energies, corrected for zero-suppression effects and calibrated for the nonlinear re-sponse of the calorimeters. Finally, the energy of a neutral hadron is obtained from the cor-responding calibrated ECAL and HCAL energies. The particle-flow objects serve as input forjet reconstruction, performed using the anti-kT algorithm [17–19] with a distance parameter of0.5. The jet transverse momentum resolution is typically 15% at pT = 10 GeV, 8% at 100 GeV,and 4% at 1 TeV; when jet clustering is based only upon the calorimeter energies, the corre-sponding resolutions are about 40%, 12%, and 5%.
Jet energy scale corrections [20] derived from data and Monte Carlo (MC) simulation are ap-plied to account for the nonlinear and nonuniform response of the calorimeters. In data, a smallresidual correction factor is included to correct for differences in jet response between data andsimulation. The combined corrections are approximately 5–10%, and their corresponding un-certainties range from 1–5%, depending on the pseudorapidity and energy of the jet. Jet qualitycriteria [21] are applied to remove misidentified jets, which arise primarily from calorimeternoise. In both data and simulated signal events, more than 99.8% of all selected jets satisfythese criteria.
3 Signal event simulationPair-produced gluinos are used to model the signal. Gluino production and decay are simu-lated using the PYTHIA [22] event generator (v6.424), with each gluino decaying to three quarksthrough the λ′′udd quark RPV coupling [23], where u and d refer to any up- or down-type quark,respectively. Two different scenarios are considered for this coupling, resulting in both an in-clusive search similar to previous analyses [8–11] and a new heavy-flavour search. For the first
3
case, the coupling of λ′′112, where the three numerical subscripts of λ refer to the quark genera-tions of the corresponding u-d-d quarks, is set to a non-zero value, giving a branching fractionof 100% for the gluino decay to three light-flavour quarks. The second case, represented byλ′′113 or λ′′223, covers gluino decays to one b quark and two light-flavour quarks. The mass ofthe generated gluino signal ranges from 200 to 500 GeV in 50 GeV steps, with additional masspoints at 750, 1000, 1250, and 1500 GeV. For the generation of this signal, all superpartnersexcept the gluino are taken to be decoupled and heavy (i.e. beyond the reach of the LHC), thenatural width of the gluino resonance is taken to be much smaller than the mass resolution ofthe detector of approximately 4–8% in the mass range investigated, and no intermediate parti-cles are produced in the gluino decay. Simulation of the CMS detector response is performedusing the GEANT4 [24] package.
4 Event selectionEvents recorded with the six-jet trigger described above are required to contain at least one re-constructed primary vertex [16]. Since this analysis targets pair-produced three-jet resonancesthat naturally yield high jet multiplicity, we require events to contain at least six jets with|η| < 2.5. To ensure that the trigger is fully efficient, we impose minimal requirements thatthe pT thresholds of the fourth and sixth jets are at least 80 and 60 GeV, respectively, though weimpose higher thresholds for two of our three selections, as described below.
We use the jet-ensemble technique [8, 9] in this analysis to combine the six highest-pT jets ineach event into all possible unique triplets. Each event that satisfies all selection requirementswill yield 20 combinations of jet triplets. For signal events, no more than two of these tripletscan be correct reconstructions of the pair-produced gluinos, with the remaining 18 triplets beingincorrect combinations of jets. Thus, background triplets arising from SM multijet events aresupplemented by “incorrect” jet-triplet combinations from the signal events themselves. Toobtain sensitivity to the presence of a three-jet resonance, an additional requirement is placedon each jet triplet to preferentially remove SM background and incorrectly combined signaltriplets. This selection criterion exploits the constant invariant mass of correctly reconstructedsignal triplets and the observed linear correlation between the invariant mass and scalar sumof jet pT for background triplets and incorrectly combined signal triplets:
Mjjj <
(3
∑i=1
piT
)− ∆ , (1)
where Mjjj is the triplet invariant mass, the pT sum is over the three jets in the triplet (tripletscalar pT), and ∆ is an empirically determined parameter. Figure 1 shows a plot of the tripletinvariant mass versus triplet scalar pT for simulated events with 400 GeV gluinos decaying tolight-flavour jets.
The value of ∆ is chosen so that the analysis is sensitive to as broad a range of gluino massesas possible given the restrictions imposed by the trigger. We find that the peak position of theMjjj distribution in data depends on the value of ∆. From a study of this peak position versus∆, we find ∆ = 110 GeV to be the optimal choice, yielding the lowest value of the peak of Mjjj.This simple ∆ requirement, rather than model-specific invariant mass requirements, maintainsthe model-independent sensitivity of our analysis to any three-jet resonance, not just that ofour signal model.
Tightening the selection requirement on the pT value of the sixth jet can reduce backgroundstemming from SM multijet production. The optimisation of this requirement to maximise
4 4 Event selection
[GeV]T
Triplet scalar p0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Trip
let
inva
rian
t m
ass
[GeV
]
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
= 8 TeVsCMS simulation at
= 400 GeVgluinoM qqq→ g~
Hadronic RPV
Figure 1: The triplet invariant mass versus the triplet scalar pT for all combinations of the sixjets from pair-produced gluinos of mass 400 GeV that decay to three light-flavour jets. The solidcoloured regions represent correctly reconstructed signal triplets, while the contour lines andlight grey scatter points represent incorrectly combined triplets. The red dashed line is basedon Eq. (1) with ∆ = 110 GeV, and the triplets to the right of the line satisfy this requirement,while those to the left do not.
signal significance is performed as follows.
As illustrated in Fig. 2 for a gluino mass of 400 GeV, the triplet invariant mass distribution forsignal events has the shape of a Gaussian peak on top of a broad base of incorrect three-jetcombinations. We define the Gaussian peak to be the signal. Following Ref. [25], we use afour-parameter function (Eq. (2)) that is representative of the estimated background in the data(see Section 5) and characterised by a steeply and monotonically decreasing shape:
dNdx
= P0
(1− x√
s
)P1
(x√s
)P2+P3 log x√s
, (2)
where N is the number of triplets and x is the triplet invariant mass. The parametrised signaland background estimates used in the optimisation procedure can be seen in the inset of Fig. 2.
Using these two components, signal triplets from the Gaussian peak and background tripletsfrom the background estimate, we define the signal significance as the ratio of the number ofsignal triplets to the square root of the number of signal triplets plus the number of backgroundtriplets obtained from data. The number of signal and background triplets is calculated withina window around the mass peak with a width corresponding to twice the expected gluino-mass resolution. This procedure is repeated for different thresholds on the sixth-jet pT in stepsof 10 GeV, for a given gluino mass. For the inclusive search, the focus is on masses that arehigher than those previously excluded by the jet-ensemble technique [10], so the mass range ofthe search starts around 400 GeV. We find that a requirement of pT ≥ 110 GeV on the sixth jetmaximises the signal significance in this mass range.
The use of b-jet identification enables us to perform a heavy-flavour search in addition to ourinclusive search for three-jet resonances. The combined secondary vertex (CSV) algorithm [26]uses variables from reconstructed secondary vertices along with track-based lifetime informa-
Triplet invariant mass [GeV]300 400 500 600 700 800
Trip
lets
/ 10
GeV
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
backgroundExpected multijet
Signal + background
Figure 2: The Mjjj distribution for pair-produced 400 GeV gluinos with light-flavour RPV de-cay into three jets is shown in the main plot. Triplets are selected that pass the ∆ = 110 GeVrequirement from Eq. (1). The Gaussian signal peak of correctly reconstructed gluino triplets isrepresented by the gold shaded area, with its Gaussian fit shown by the blue dot-dashed linebelow it. The distribution of incorrectly combined triplets, shown in black, is described by asimilar functional form as that used to estimate the background in data. The inset shows thesignal and background estimates used in the optimisation procedure, with the expected back-ground from SM multijet processes in red, and the signal-plus-background indicated by a bluedashed line.
tion to identify b jets. The tagging efficiency for b jets changes with the pT of the jet, rangingfrom 70% for jets with 100 ≤ pT ≤ 200 GeV to 55% for jets with pT ≥ 500 GeV. We study differ-ent b-tagging requirements for signal events with simulated gluinos that have heavy-flavourdecays and use the same definition of the signal significance as for the sixth-jet pT optimisa-tion to determine the best choice. The CSV medium operating point, with a mistagging rateof about 1% for light-flavour jets, is found to be the optimal choice for detecting a potentialsignal in this analysis. The requirement that each event contain at least one b-tagged jet (b tag)increases the signal significance, and the additional requirement that all selected triplets havea b tag removes a large portion of the incorrectly combined signal triplets.
For the heavy-flavour analysis, we distinguish between a low-mass region covering gluinomasses between 200 and 600 GeV and a high-mass region covering larger gluino masses. Forthe low-mass region, we maximise signal acceptance by using jet-pT requirements of ≥80 GeVfor the fourth jet and≥60 GeV for the sixth jet. For the high-mass region, the sixth jet is requiredto have pT ≥110 GeV. For both the low- and high-mass regions, the value ∆ = 110 GeV is used.All-hadronic tt event production is a significant background in the low-mass region. We use ttevents that produce triplets with masses in this region to help validate our analysis technique,as described below.
High-mass signal events, for both the light- and heavy-flavour signal models, have a morespherical shape than background events, which typically contain back-to-back jets and thushave a more linear shape. To significantly reduce the background in the high-mass searches,we use a sphericity variable, S = 3
2 (λ2 + λ3), where the λi variables are eigenvalues of the
6 4 Event selection
following tensor [22]:
Sαβ =
∑i
pαi pβ
i
∑i|pi|2
, (3)
where α and β label separate jets, and the sphericity S is calculated using all jets in each event. Acomparison of the sphericity variable for data, simulated SM multijet events, and three differentsimulated gluino masses can be seen in Fig. 3. For the inclusive search and the high-mass,heavy-flavour search, selected events are required to have S ≥ 0.4, which is based on theoptimisation of the number of expected signal events divided by the square root of the numberof signal-plus-background events. No sphericity requirement is used for the low-mass, heavy-flavour selection because low-mass signal events do not have a significant shape differencefrom background events.
Sphericity0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Fra
ctio
n
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06 Data
Multijet MC = 300 GeVgluinoM
= 750 GeVgluinoM
= 1250 GeVgluinoM
= 8 TeVs at -1CMS, L = 19.4 fb
60 GeV≥ T
-jet pth6
80 GeV≥ T
-jet pth4
60 GeV≥ T
-jet pth6
80 GeV≥ T
-jet pth4
60 GeV≥ T
-jet pth6
80 GeV≥ T
-jet pth4
60 GeV≥ T
-jet pth6
80 GeV≥ T
-jet pth4
60 GeV≥ T
-jet pth6
80 GeV≥ T
-jet pth4
Figure 3: The sphericity variable for events from data, simulated background from SM multi-jet processes (shaded area), and simulated gluino signal masses of 300 (open diamonds), 750(open triangles), and 1250 GeV (open squares), where the gluinos decay to light-flavour jets.Event-level selection requirements for the inclusive, low-mass search are applied, except forthe triplet-level diagonal selection (Eq. (1)). All distributions are normalised to unit area. Thesimulated SM multijet events are generated by MADGRAPH [27] with showering performed byPYTHIA.
To conclude, we define three different search regions for this analysis with specific selectioncriteria applied as previously discussed and summarised in Table 1.
Table 1: Selection requirements for the three search regions in the analysis.
Selection Inclusive Heavy-flavour searchcriteria search low mass high mass
Mass range 400–1500 GeV 200–600 GeV 600–1500 GeV∆ 110 GeV 110 GeV 110 GeV
5 Background estimation and signal extractionThe dominant background for this search comes from SM multijet events, which arise from per-turbative QCD processes of order O(α3
s ) and higher. The invariant mass shape of incorrectlycombined signal triplets is found to be similar to that of the background from SM multijet pro-cesses, such that the combined distribution is consistent with that of SM multijets alone. More-over, because the normalisation of the background component (P0 in Eq. (2)) is unconstrained,any incorrectly combined signal triplets, if present, would be absorbed into the backgroundestimate. The triplet invariant mass distribution for the background decreases smoothly withincreasing mass, and we model this background using a four-parameter function (Eq. (2)) fitdirectly to the data, except in the case of the low-mass, heavy-flavour search.
For the low-mass, heavy-flavour search, there is an additional background contribution fromall-hadronic tt events. These events are modelled using the MADGRAPH [27] generator, andthe expected number of tt events is determined from the next-to-next-to-leading-order (NNLO)cross section of 245.8 +8.7
−10.5 pb [28]. The shape of the contribution from SM multijet processes ismodelled with a statistically independent data sample, constructed by imposing a veto on b-tagged jets while retaining all other selection requirements. This sample is referred to as theb-jet control region, and the combination of simulated tt events and the background from SMmultijet processes, modelled by this control region, gives the total SM background estimate forthe low-mass, heavy-flavour analysis.
A comparison of the background estimate to the data is performed, in which the data are fit us-ing a binned maximum likelihood method with either the four-parameter function of Eq. (2) forthe inclusive analysis and the high-mass, heavy-flavour analysis, or the background shape de-scribed above for the low-mass, heavy-flavour analysis. Figure 4 shows a comparison betweenthe three-jet invariant mass distribution in data and the background estimate for the inclusiveanalysis. Figure 5 shows the comparisons between data and background estimates for the low-and high-mass heavy-flavour analyses. In all three cases, no statistically significant deviationsfrom the data are observed.
As a validation of the analysis technique, we consider the tt triplets as a signal with the back-ground solely composed of triplets from SM multijet processes, whose shape is modelled bythe b-jet control region, with the small amount of simulated tt events without b tags subtracted.The tt cross section is extracted based on the contribution of its signal triplets and is comparedwith the theoretical prediction for the cross section of 245.8 pb. The measurement yields a resultof 205± 28 pb (combined statistical and systematic uncertainties), which is within less than twostandard deviations from the theoretical value, thereby showing our technique can successfullyreconstruct hadronically decaying tt events.
To obtain an estimate of the number of signal triplets expected after all selection criteria areapplied, the sum of a Gaussian function that represents the signal and a four-parameter func-tion (Eq. (2)) that models the incorrectly combined signal triplets is fit to the simulated Mjjjdistribution for each gluino mass. The Gaussian component of the fit provides the estimatefor the expected number of signal triplets. The factors in this overall triplet signal efficiencyare the event acceptance, governed by the kinematic and b-tagging selections, and the tripletrate, which represents the number of selected triplets per selected event. This triplet rate is theproduct of the average number of triplets per event times the proportion of triplets containedin the Gaussian signal peak compared with the full distribution. Width and acceptance-times-efficiency (A× ε) are both parametrised as functions of gluino mass, as shown in Fig. 6. Thewidth of the Gaussian function modelling the signal varies according to the detector resolu-tion, ranging from 17 to 70 GeV for gluino masses from 200 to 1500 GeV. The A× ε ranges from
Figure 4: Comparison of the three-jet invariant mass distribution in data with the backgroundestimate for the inclusive analysis (red solid curve) obtained from a maximum likelihood fit tothe data. The error bars on the black data points display the statistical uncertainties. The binwidths increase with mass to match the expected resolution. The bottom plot shows, for eachbin, the difference of the data and fit values divided by the statistical uncertainty in the data.No statistically significant deviations from the data are observed. The light magenta dotted lineand hatched area show the distribution and pulls for a simulated 500 GeV gluino that decaysinto light-flavour jets. Similarly, the expectation for a 750 GeV gluino is shown by a dark bluedashed line and shaded area.
about 0.003 to 0.033 for the inclusive search for gluino masses from 400–1500 GeV, and, for theheavy-flavour search, from 0.005 to 0.04 for masses from 200–600 GeV, and from 0.008 to 0.015for masses from 600–1500 GeV. For high-mass gluinos, the A× ε flattens slightly because of thedecreased efficiency to reconstruct triplets in the Gaussian signal peak.
6 Systematic uncertaintiesSystematic uncertainties in the signal acceptance are assigned in the following manner. For un-certainties related to the jet energy scale (JES) [20], the jet energy corrections are varied withintheir uncertainties for each signal mass, and then the entire selection procedure is repeated todetermine the parametrised values of the A× ε. The largest difference from the nominal val-ues is taken as a systematic uncertainty. To evaluate the systematic uncertainty associated withthe level of simulated ISR and FSR for signal events, i.e. the spontaneous emission of gluonsfrom incoming or outgoing participants of the hard interaction, dedicated signal samples aregenerated where the relative amounts of ISR and FSR are coherently increased or decreasedwith respect to the nominal setting of the PYTHIA event generator [29]. The parameter con-
Figure 5: Comparison of the three-jet invariant mass distribution in data with the backgroundestimate for the heavy-flavour analysis. The left plot shows the results from the low-massselection. The background contribution from the b-jet control region is shown as the light blueshaded area, while that from simulated tt events is shown as the dark red shaded area. Theright plot shows the high-mass sample with resolution-based binning. The error bars on theblack data points display the statistical uncertainties. The bottom plots show the differenceof the data and the background estimate divided by the statistical uncertainty in the data ineach bin. The light magenta dashed line and hatched area show the distribution and pulls fora simulated 500 GeV gluino that decays into heavy-flavour jets.
Gluino mass [GeV]400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Gau
ssia
n w
idth
[G
eV]
20
30
40
50
60
70
Gaussian width
Uncertainty
= 8 TeVsCMS simulation at
qqq→ g~Hadronic RPV
= 110 GeV∆ 110 GeV≥
T-jet pth6
0.4≥ Sphericity
Gluino mass [GeV]400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Acc
epta
nce
x E
ffic
ien
cy
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
= 8 TeVsCMS simulation at
qqq→ g~Hadronic RPV
= 110 GeV∆ 110 GeV≥
T-jet pth6
Acc. x Eff.
Uncertainty
0.4≥ Sphericity
Figure 6: The signal parametrisation shown as a function of gluino mass for the inclusivesearch. The Gaussian signal width (left) and the A × ε parametrisation (right) versus signalmass are both shown. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematicuncertainties.
10 7 Results and limits
trolling the amount of ISR (PARP(67)) is varied around its central value of 2.5 by ±0.5 andthat for the FSR (PARP(71)) is varied from 2.5 to 8, with a nominal value of 4.0. For each sam-ple, the rederived A× ε is compared to the nominal value, and the difference is taken as thesystematic uncertainty. Analogously, an uncertainty is assigned to account for the effects ofmultiple pp collisions in an event (pileup) by reweighting all MC signal samples such that thedistribution of the number of interactions per bunch crossing is shifted, high and low, by onestandard deviation compared with that found in data [30]. For the analyses using b tagging,an uncertainty is assigned based on the scale factor that comprises the differences in b-taggingefficiencies in data compared with simulation [26]. The same procedure as outlined above isrepeated, where the b-tagging scale factors are varied within their uncertainties, and the effecton A × ε is evaluated. Uncertainties in the fit parameters of the Gaussian signal are used asan additional systematic uncertainty for each mass point. Finally, an overall systematic uncer-tainty of 2.6% is assigned to the integrated luminosity measurement [12]. The ranges in thevalues of these uncertainties are summarised in Table 2. Systematic uncertainties related to thesignal and background shapes are discussed in Section 7.
Table 2: Systematic uncertainties on the signal A× ε included in limit setting.
Source of systematic uncertainty ValueJES 3–16%
ISR/FSR 5–11%Pileup 1–5%
b tagging 1–7%Signal fit 4–12%
Luminosity 2.6%
7 Results and limitsThe three-jet invariant mass distributions are examined for a Gaussian signal peak on top of thesmoothly falling background distribution. As has been described, this analysis uses differentselection criteria to search for resonances coupling to light-flavour and to heavy-flavour quarks,with the latter search done separately in low-mass and high-mass regions. In the analysis ofeach of the three selections, the background normalisation parameter is unconstrained andis therefore determined by the SM multijet component of the combined fit. For the functiondescribing the background, the initial values of its parameters are taken from the background-only hypothesis fit to the data, while they are allowed to float in the background-plus-signalhypothesis fits for the limit calculation. The signal is modelled with Gaussians defined bythe width and A × ε curves shown in Fig. 6. The uncertainties in the expected number ofsignal triplets are included as log-normal constraints, where the uncertainty for the width ofthe Gaussian includes a 10% systematic uncertainty to account for jet resolution effects [20]. Forthe tt background estimate, uncertainties in both the shape and normalisation are included. Inaddition to those already discussed in the previous section, uncertainties due to ambiguities inthe parton shower matching procedure between the MADGRAPH and PYTHIA event generators,as well as those due to the dependence on the renormalisation and factorisation scale, are takeninto account.
Upper limits are placed on the cross section times branching fraction for the production ofthree-jet resonances. A modified-frequentist approach, using the CLs [31, 32] technique and aprofile likelihood as the test statistic, is employed. Limits are calculated with the frequentist
11
asymptotic calculator implemented in the ROOSTATS [33, 34] package. The full CLs calcula-tions give similar limits within a few percent, and closure tests where a fixed signal is injected,yield consistent coverage. The observed and expected 95% confidence level (CL) upper limitson the gluino pair-production cross section times branching fraction as a function of gluinomass are presented in Fig. 7. The solid red lines in the figure show the next-to-leading-order(NLO) plus next-to-leading-logarithm (NLL) cross sections for gluino pair production [35–39],and the dashed red lines indicate the corresponding one-standard-deviation (σ) uncertainties,which range between 15% and 43%. To quote final results, we use the points where the −1σ-uncertainty curve for the NLO+NLL cross section crosses the expected- and observed-limitcurves. We additionally quote the result where the central theoretical curve intersects the limitcurves.
The production of gluinos undergoing RPV decays into light-flavour jets is excluded at 95%CL for gluino masses below 650 GeV, with a less conservative exclusion of 670 GeV based uponthe theory value at the central scale. The respective expected limits are 755 and 795 GeV. Theseresults extend the limit of 460 GeV [10] obtained with the 7 TeV CMS dataset. Gluinos whosedecay includes a heavy-flavour jet are excluded for masses between 200 and 835 GeV, whichis the most stringent mass limit to date for this model of RPV gluino decay, with the less con-servative exclusion up to 855 GeV from the central theoretical value. The respective expectedlimits are 825 and 860 GeV. While a smaller phase space is probed in the heavy-flavour search,the limits extend to higher masses because of the reduction of the background.
Triplet invariant mass [GeV]400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Figure 7: Observed and expected 95% CL cross section limits as a function of mass for theinclusive (left) and heavy-flavour searches (right). The limits for the heavy-flavour search covertwo mass ranges, one for low-mass gluinos ranging from 200 to 600 GeV, and one for high-massgluinos covering the remainder of the mass range up to 1500 GeV. The solid red lines show theNLO+NLL predictions [35–39], and the dashed red lines give the corresponding one-standard-deviation uncertainty bands [40].
8 SummaryA search for hadronic resonance production in pp collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 8 TeVhas been conducted by the CMS experiment at the LHC with a data sample corresponding toan integrated luminosity of 19.4 fb−1. The approach is model independent, with event selectioncriteria optimised using the RPV supersymmetric model for gluino pair production in a six-jetfinal state. Two different scenarios for this RPV decay have been considered: gluinos decayingexclusively to light-flavour jets, and gluinos decaying to one b-quark jet and two light-flavour
12 References
jets, with the assumption in both cases of a 100% branching fraction for gluinos decaying toquark jets. Methods based on data have been used to derive estimates of background fromSM multijet processes. Events with high jet multiplicity and a large scalar sum of jet pT havebeen analysed for the presence of signal events, and no deviation has been found between thestandard model background expectations and the measured mass distributions. The produc-tion of gluinos undergoing RPV decay into light-flavour jets has been excluded at the 95% CLfor masses below 650 GeV. Gluinos that include a heavy-flavour jet in their decay have beenexcluded at 95% CL for masses between 200 and 835 GeV, which is the most stringent limit todate for this model of gluino decay.
AcknowledgementsWe congratulate our colleagues in the CERN accelerator departments for the excellent perfor-mance of the LHC and thank the technical and administrative staffs at CERN and at other CMSinstitutes for their contributions to the success of the CMS effort. In addition, we gratefully ac-knowledge the computing centres and personnel of the Worldwide LHC Computing Grid fordelivering so effectively the computing infrastructure essential to our analyses. Finally, we ac-knowledge the enduring support for the construction and operation of the LHC and the CMSdetector provided by the following funding agencies: BMWF and FWF (Austria); FNRS andFWO (Belgium); CNPq, CAPES, FAPERJ, and FAPESP (Brazil); MES (Bulgaria); CERN; CAS,MoST, and NSFC (China); COLCIENCIAS (Colombia); MSES (Croatia); RPF (Cyprus); MoER,SF0690030s09 and ERDF (Estonia); Academy of Finland, MEC, and HIP (Finland); CEA andCNRS/IN2P3 (France); BMBF, DFG, and HGF (Germany); GSRT (Greece); OTKA and NKTH(Hungary); DAE and DST (India); IPM (Iran); SFI (Ireland); INFN (Italy); NRF and WCU(Republic of Korea); LAS (Lithuania); CINVESTAV, CONACYT, SEP, and UASLP-FAI (Mex-ico); MBIE (New Zealand); PAEC (Pakistan); MSHE and NSC (Poland); FCT (Portugal); JINR(Dubna); MON, RosAtom, RAS and RFBR (Russia); MESTD (Serbia); SEIDI and CPAN (Spain);Swiss Funding Agencies (Switzerland); NSC (Taipei); ThEPCenter, IPST, STAR and NSTDA(Thailand); TUBITAK and TAEK (Turkey); NASU (Ukraine); STFC (United Kingdom); DOEand NSF (USA).
References[1] E. Farhi and L. Susskind, “Grand Unified Theory with Heavy Color”, Phys. Rev. D 20
(1979) 3404, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.20.3404.
[2] W. J. Marciano, “Exotic New Quarks and Dynamical Symmetry Breaking”, Phys. Rev. D21 (1980) 2425, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.21.2425.
[3] P. H. Frampton and S. L. Glashow, “Unifiable Chiral Color with NaturalGlashow-Iliopoulos-Maiani Mechanism”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 58 (1987) 2168,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.58.2168.
[4] P. H. Frampton and S. L. Glashow, “Chiral Color: An Alternative to the Standard Model”,Phys. Lett. B 190 (1987) 157, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(87)90859-8.
[5] R. S. Chivukula, M. Golden, and E. H. Simmons, “Six Jet Signals of Highly ColoredFermions”, Phys. Lett. B 257 (1991) 403, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(91)91915-I.
[6] R. S. Chivukula, M. Golden, and E. H. Simmons, “Multi-jet Physics at Hadron Colliders”,Nucl. Phys. B 363 (1991) 83, doi:10.1016/0550-3213(91)90235-P.
[15] CMS Collaboration, “Commissioning of the Particle-flow Event Reconstruction with thefirst LHC collisions recorded in the CMS detector”, CMS Physics Analysis SummaryCMS-PAS-PFT-10-001, (2010).
[16] CMS Collaboration, “Tracking and Primary Vertex Results in First 7 TeV Collisions”,CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-TRK-10-005, (2010).
[17] M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez, “The Anti-kt Jet Clustering Algorithm”, JHEP 04(2008) 063, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/04/063, arXiv:0802.1189.
[18] M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez, “FastJet user manual”, Eur. Phys. J. C 72 (2012)1896, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1896-2, arXiv:1111.6097.
[19] M. Cacciari and G. P. Salam, “Dispelling the N3 myth for the kt jet-finder”, Phys. Lett. B641 (2006) 57, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2006.08.037,arXiv:hep-ph/0512210.
[20] CMS Collaboration, “Determination of jet energy calibration and transverse momentumresolution in CMS”, JINST 6 (2011) 11002, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/6/11/P11002,arXiv:1107.4277.
[21] CMS Collaboration, “Jet Performance in pp Collisions at 7 TeV”, CMS Physics AnalysisSummary CMS-PAS-JME-10-003, (2010).
[22] T. Sjostrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Skands, “PYTHIA 6.4 physics and manual”, JHEP 05(2006) 026, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2006/05/026, arXiv:hep-ph/0603175.
[25] CMS Collaboration, “Search for narrow resonances using the dijet mass spectrum in ppcollisions at
√s = 8 TeV”, Phys. Rev. D 87 (2013) 114015,
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.114015, arXiv:1302.4794.
[26] CMS Collaboration, “Identification of b-quark jets with the CMS experiment”, JINST 8(2013) P04013, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/8/04/P04013, arXiv:1211.4462.
[27] J. Alwall et al., “MadGraph/MadEvent v4: the new web generation”, JHEP 09 (2007)028, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2007/09/028, arXiv:0706.2334.
[28] M. Czakon, P. Fiedler, and A. Mitov, “The total top quark pair production cross-section athadron colliders through O(α4
S)”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013) 252004,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.252004, arXiv:1303.6254.
[29] CMS Collaboration, “Dijet Azimuthal Decorrelations in pp Collisions at√
s = 7 TeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett. 106 (2011) 122003, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.122003.
[30] CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the inelastic proton-proton cross section at√s = 7 TeV”, Phys. Lett. B 722 (2013) 5, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2013.03.024.
[31] T. Junk, “Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics”,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 434 (1999) 435, doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(99)00498-2,arXiv:hep-ex/9902006.
[32] A. L. Read, “Presentation of search results: the CLS technique”, J. Phys. G 28 (2002) 2693,doi:10.1088/0954-3899/28/10/313.
[33] G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells, “Asymptotic formulae forlikelihood-based tests of new physics”, Eur. Phys. J. C 71 (2011) 1554,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1554-0, arXiv:1007.1727.
[34] L. Moneta et al., “The RooStats Project”, in 13th International Workshop on AdvancedComputing and Analysis Techniques in Physics Research (ACAT2010). SISSA, 2010.arXiv:1009.1003.
[35] W. Beenakker, R. Hopker, M. Spira, and P. M. Zerwas, “Squark and gluino production athadron colliders”, Nucl. Phys. B 492 (1997) 51,doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(97)80027-2, arXiv:hep-ph/9610490.
[36] A. Kulesza and L. Motyka, “Threshold Resummation for Squark-Antisquark andGluino-Pair Production at the LHC”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 (2009) 111802,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.111802, arXiv:0807.2405.
[37] A. Kulesza and L. Motyka, “Soft gluon resummation for the production of gluino-gluinoand squark-antisquark pairs at the LHC”, Phys. Rev. D 80 (2009) 095004,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.80.095004, arXiv:0905.4749.
[38] W. Beenakker et al., “Soft-gluon resummation for squark and gluino hadroproduction”,JHEP 12 (2009) 041, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2009/12/041, arXiv:0909.4418.
A The CMS CollaborationYerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, ArmeniaS. Chatrchyan, V. Khachatryan, A.M. Sirunyan, A. Tumasyan
Institut fur Hochenergiephysik der OeAW, Wien, AustriaW. Adam, T. Bergauer, M. Dragicevic, J. Ero, C. Fabjan1, M. Friedl, R. Fruhwirth1, V.M. Ghete,N. Hormann, J. Hrubec, M. Jeitler1, W. Kiesenhofer, V. Knunz, M. Krammer1, I. Kratschmer,D. Liko, I. Mikulec, D. Rabady2, B. Rahbaran, H. Rohringer, R. Schofbeck, J. Strauss, A. Taurok,W. Treberer-Treberspurg, W. Waltenberger, C.-E. Wulz1
National Centre for Particle and High Energy Physics, Minsk, BelarusV. Mossolov, N. Shumeiko, J. Suarez Gonzalez
Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, BelgiumS. Alderweireldt, M. Bansal, S. Bansal, T. Cornelis, E.A. De Wolf, X. Janssen, A. Knutsson,S. Luyckx, L. Mucibello, S. Ochesanu, B. Roland, R. Rougny, Z. Staykova, H. Van Haevermaet,P. Van Mechelen, N. Van Remortel, A. Van Spilbeeck
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, BelgiumF. Blekman, S. Blyweert, J. D’Hondt, N. Heracleous, A. Kalogeropoulos, J. Keaveney, S. Lowette,M. Maes, A. Olbrechts, S. Tavernier, W. Van Doninck, P. Van Mulders, G.P. Van Onsem, I. Villella
Universite Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, BelgiumC. Caillol, B. Clerbaux, G. De Lentdecker, L. Favart, A.P.R. Gay, T. Hreus, A. Leonard,P.E. Marage, A. Mohammadi, L. Pernie, T. Reis, T. Seva, L. Thomas, C. Vander Velde, P. Vanlaer,J. Wang
Ghent University, Ghent, BelgiumV. Adler, K. Beernaert, L. Benucci, A. Cimmino, S. Costantini, S. Dildick, G. Garcia, B. Klein,J. Lellouch, A. Marinov, J. Mccartin, A.A. Ocampo Rios, D. Ryckbosch, M. Sigamani, N. Strobbe,F. Thyssen, M. Tytgat, S. Walsh, E. Yazgan, N. Zaganidis
Universite Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, BelgiumS. Basegmez, C. Beluffi3, G. Bruno, R. Castello, A. Caudron, L. Ceard, G.G. Da Silveira,C. Delaere, T. du Pree, D. Favart, L. Forthomme, A. Giammanco4, J. Hollar, P. Jez, V. Lemaitre,J. Liao, O. Militaru, C. Nuttens, D. Pagano, A. Pin, K. Piotrzkowski, A. Popov5, M. Selvaggi,M. Vidal Marono, J.M. Vizan Garcia
Universite de Mons, Mons, BelgiumN. Beliy, T. Caebergs, E. Daubie, G.H. Hammad
Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Fisicas, Rio de Janeiro, BrazilG.A. Alves, M. Correa Martins Junior, T. Martins, M.E. Pol, M.H.G. Souza
Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, BrazilW.L. Alda Junior, W. Carvalho, J. Chinellato6, A. Custodio, E.M. Da Costa, D. De Jesus Damiao,C. De Oliveira Martins, S. Fonseca De Souza, H. Malbouisson, M. Malek, D. Matos Figueiredo,L. Mundim, H. Nogima, W.L. Prado Da Silva, J. Santaolalla, A. Santoro, A. Sznajder, E.J. TonelliManganote6, A. Vilela Pereira
Universidade Estadual Paulista a, Universidade Federal do ABC b, Sao Paulo, BrazilC.A. Bernardesb, F.A. Diasa,7, T.R. Fernandez Perez Tomeia, E.M. Gregoresb, C. Laganaa,P.G. Mercadanteb, S.F. Novaesa, Sandra S. Padulaa
18 A The CMS Collaboration
Institute for Nuclear Research and Nuclear Energy, Sofia, BulgariaV. Genchev2, P. Iaydjiev2, S. Piperov, M. Rodozov, G. Sultanov, M. Vutova
University of Sofia, Sofia, BulgariaA. Dimitrov, I. Glushkov, R. Hadjiiska, V. Kozhuharov, L. Litov, B. Pavlov, P. Petkov
Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing, ChinaJ.G. Bian, G.M. Chen, H.S. Chen, M. Chen, C.H. Jiang, D. Liang, S. Liang, X. Meng, R. Plestina8,J. Tao, X. Wang, Z. Wang
State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, ChinaC. Asawatangtrakuldee, Y. Ban, Y. Guo, Q. Li, W. Li, S. Liu, Y. Mao, S.J. Qian, D. Wang, L. Zhang,W. Zou
Universidad de Los Andes, Bogota, ColombiaC. Avila, C.A. Carrillo Montoya, L.F. Chaparro Sierra, C. Florez, J.P. Gomez, B. Gomez Moreno,J.C. Sanabria
Technical University of Split, Split, CroatiaN. Godinovic, D. Lelas, D. Polic, I. Puljak
University of Split, Split, CroatiaZ. Antunovic, M. Kovac
Institute Rudjer Boskovic, Zagreb, CroatiaV. Brigljevic, K. Kadija, J. Luetic, D. Mekterovic, S. Morovic, L. Tikvica
University of Cyprus, Nicosia, CyprusA. Attikis, G. Mavromanolakis, J. Mousa, C. Nicolaou, F. Ptochos, P.A. Razis
Charles University, Prague, Czech RepublicM. Finger, M. Finger Jr.
Academy of Scientific Research and Technology of the Arab Republic of Egypt, EgyptianNetwork of High Energy Physics, Cairo, EgyptA.A. Abdelalim9, Y. Assran10, S. Elgammal9, A. Ellithi Kamel11, M.A. Mahmoud12, A. Radi13,14
National Institute of Chemical Physics and Biophysics, Tallinn, EstoniaM. Kadastik, M. Muntel, M. Murumaa, M. Raidal, L. Rebane, A. Tiko
Department of Physics, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, FinlandP. Eerola, G. Fedi, M. Voutilainen
Helsinki Institute of Physics, Helsinki, FinlandJ. Harkonen, V. Karimaki, R. Kinnunen, M.J. Kortelainen, T. Lampen, K. Lassila-Perini, S. Lehti,T. Linden, P. Luukka, T. Maenpaa, T. Peltola, E. Tuominen, J. Tuominiemi, E. Tuovinen,L. Wendland
Lappeenranta University of Technology, Lappeenranta, FinlandT. Tuuva
DSM/IRFU, CEA/Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, FranceM. Besancon, F. Couderc, M. Dejardin, D. Denegri, B. Fabbro, J.L. Faure, F. Ferri, S. Ganjour,A. Givernaud, P. Gras, G. Hamel de Monchenault, P. Jarry, E. Locci, J. Malcles, A. Nayak,J. Rander, A. Rosowsky, M. Titov
19
Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, Ecole Polytechnique, IN2P3-CNRS, Palaiseau, FranceS. Baffioni, F. Beaudette, L. Benhabib, M. Bluj15, P. Busson, C. Charlot, N. Daci, T. Dahms,M. Dalchenko, L. Dobrzynski, A. Florent, R. Granier de Cassagnac, M. Haguenauer, P. Mine,C. Mironov, I.N. Naranjo, M. Nguyen, C. Ochando, P. Paganini, D. Sabes, R. Salerno, Y. Sirois,C. Veelken, A. Zabi
Institut Pluridisciplinaire Hubert Curien, Universite de Strasbourg, Universite de HauteAlsace Mulhouse, CNRS/IN2P3, Strasbourg, FranceJ.-L. Agram16, J. Andrea, D. Bloch, J.-M. Brom, E.C. Chabert, C. Collard, E. Conte16,F. Drouhin16, J.-C. Fontaine16, D. Gele, U. Goerlach, C. Goetzmann, P. Juillot, A.-C. Le Bihan,P. Van Hove
Centre de Calcul de l’Institut National de Physique Nucleaire et de Physique des Particules,CNRS/IN2P3, Villeurbanne, FranceS. Gadrat
Universite de Lyon, Universite Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS-IN2P3, Institut de PhysiqueNucleaire de Lyon, Villeurbanne, FranceS. Beauceron, N. Beaupere, G. Boudoul, S. Brochet, J. Chasserat, R. Chierici, D. Contardo,P. Depasse, H. El Mamouni, J. Fan, J. Fay, S. Gascon, M. Gouzevitch, B. Ille, T. Kurca,M. Lethuillier, L. Mirabito, S. Perries, J.D. Ruiz Alvarez17, L. Sgandurra, V. Sordini, M. VanderDonckt, P. Verdier, S. Viret, H. Xiao
Institute of High Energy Physics and Informatization, Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi,GeorgiaZ. Tsamalaidze18
RWTH Aachen University, I. Physikalisches Institut, Aachen, GermanyC. Autermann, S. Beranek, M. Bontenackels, B. Calpas, M. Edelhoff, L. Feld, O. Hindrichs,K. Klein, A. Ostapchuk, A. Perieanu, F. Raupach, J. Sammet, S. Schael, D. Sprenger, H. Weber,B. Wittmer, V. Zhukov5
RWTH Aachen University, III. Physikalisches Institut A, Aachen, GermanyM. Ata, J. Caudron, E. Dietz-Laursonn, D. Duchardt, M. Erdmann, R. Fischer, A. Guth,T. Hebbeker, C. Heidemann, K. Hoepfner, D. Klingebiel, S. Knutzen, P. Kreuzer,M. Merschmeyer, A. Meyer, M. Olschewski, K. Padeken, P. Papacz, H. Pieta, H. Reithler,S.A. Schmitz, L. Sonnenschein, D. Teyssier, S. Thuer, M. Weber
RWTH Aachen University, III. Physikalisches Institut B, Aachen, GermanyV. Cherepanov, Y. Erdogan, G. Flugge, H. Geenen, M. Geisler, W. Haj Ahmad, F. Hoehle,B. Kargoll, T. Kress, Y. Kuessel, J. Lingemann2, A. Nowack, I.M. Nugent, L. Perchalla, O. Pooth,A. Stahl
Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron, Hamburg, GermanyI. Asin, N. Bartosik, J. Behr, W. Behrenhoff, U. Behrens, A.J. Bell, M. Bergholz19, A. Bethani,K. Borras, A. Burgmeier, A. Cakir, L. Calligaris, A. Campbell, S. Choudhury, F. Costanza,C. Diez Pardos, S. Dooling, T. Dorland, G. Eckerlin, D. Eckstein, G. Flucke, A. Geiser,A. Grebenyuk, P. Gunnellini, S. Habib, J. Hauk, G. Hellwig, M. Hempel, D. Horton, H. Jung,M. Kasemann, P. Katsas, C. Kleinwort, H. Kluge, M. Kramer, D. Krucker, W. Lange, J. Leonard,K. Lipka, W. Lohmann19, B. Lutz, R. Mankel, I. Marfin, I.-A. Melzer-Pellmann, A.B. Meyer,J. Mnich, A. Mussgiller, S. Naumann-Emme, O. Novgorodova, F. Nowak, J. Olzem, H. Perrey,A. Petrukhin, D. Pitzl, R. Placakyte, A. Raspereza, P.M. Ribeiro Cipriano, C. Riedl, E. Ron,
20 A The CMS Collaboration
M.O. Sahin, J. Salfeld-Nebgen, R. Schmidt19, T. Schoerner-Sadenius, M. Schroder, N. Sen,M. Stein, R. Walsh, C. Wissing
University of Hamburg, Hamburg, GermanyM. Aldaya Martin, V. Blobel, H. Enderle, J. Erfle, E. Garutti, U. Gebbert, M. Gorner,M. Gosselink, J. Haller, K. Heine, R.S. Hoing, G. Kaussen, H. Kirschenmann, R. Klanner,R. Kogler, J. Lange, I. Marchesini, T. Peiffer, N. Pietsch, D. Rathjens, C. Sander, H. Schettler,P. Schleper, E. Schlieckau, A. Schmidt, T. Schum, M. Seidel, J. Sibille20, V. Sola, H. Stadie,G. Steinbruck, J. Thomsen, D. Troendle, E. Usai, L. Vanelderen
Institut fur Experimentelle Kernphysik, Karlsruhe, GermanyC. Barth, C. Baus, J. Berger, C. Boser, E. Butz, T. Chwalek, W. De Boer, A. Descroix, A. Dierlamm,M. Feindt, M. Guthoff2, F. Hartmann2, T. Hauth2, H. Held, K.H. Hoffmann, U. Husemann,I. Katkov5, J.R. Komaragiri, A. Kornmayer2, E. Kuznetsova, P. Lobelle Pardo, D. Martschei,M.U. Mozer, Th. Muller, M. Niegel, A. Nurnberg, O. Oberst, J. Ott, G. Quast, K. Rabbertz,F. Ratnikov, S. Rocker, F.-P. Schilling, G. Schott, H.J. Simonis, F.M. Stober, R. Ulrich, J. Wagner-Kuhr, S. Wayand, T. Weiler, M. Zeise
Institute of Nuclear and Particle Physics (INPP), NCSR Demokritos, Aghia Paraskevi,GreeceG. Anagnostou, G. Daskalakis, T. Geralis, S. Kesisoglou, A. Kyriakis, D. Loukas, A. Markou,C. Markou, E. Ntomari, I. Topsis-giotis
University of Athens, Athens, GreeceL. Gouskos, A. Panagiotou, N. Saoulidou, E. Stiliaris
University of Ioannina, Ioannina, GreeceX. Aslanoglou, I. Evangelou, G. Flouris, C. Foudas, P. Kokkas, N. Manthos, I. Papadopoulos,E. Paradas
KFKI Research Institute for Particle and Nuclear Physics, Budapest, HungaryG. Bencze, C. Hajdu, P. Hidas, D. Horvath21, F. Sikler, V. Veszpremi, G. Vesztergombi22,A.J. Zsigmond
Institute of Nuclear Research ATOMKI, Debrecen, HungaryN. Beni, S. Czellar, J. Molnar, J. Palinkas, Z. Szillasi
University of Debrecen, Debrecen, HungaryJ. Karancsi, P. Raics, Z.L. Trocsanyi, B. Ujvari
National Institute of Science Education and Research, Bhubaneswar, IndiaS.K. Swain23
Panjab University, Chandigarh, IndiaS.B. Beri, V. Bhatnagar, N. Dhingra, R. Gupta, M. Kaur, M.Z. Mehta, M. Mittal, N. Nishu,A. Sharma, J.B. Singh
University of Delhi, Delhi, IndiaAshok Kumar, Arun Kumar, S. Ahuja, A. Bhardwaj, B.C. Choudhary, A. Kumar, S. Malhotra,M. Naimuddin, K. Ranjan, P. Saxena, V. Sharma, R.K. Shivpuri
Saha Institute of Nuclear Physics, Kolkata, IndiaS. Banerjee, S. Bhattacharya, K. Chatterjee, S. Dutta, B. Gomber, Sa. Jain, Sh. Jain, R. Khurana,A. Modak, S. Mukherjee, D. Roy, S. Sarkar, M. Sharan, A.P. Singh
21
Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai, IndiaA. Abdulsalam, D. Dutta, S. Kailas, V. Kumar, A.K. Mohanty2, L.M. Pant, P. Shukla, A. Topkar
Tata Institute of Fundamental Research - EHEP, Mumbai, IndiaT. Aziz, R.M. Chatterjee, S. Ganguly, S. Ghosh, M. Guchait24, A. Gurtu25, G. Kole,S. Kumar, M. Maity26, G. Majumder, K. Mazumdar, G.B. Mohanty, B. Parida, K. Sudhakar,N. Wickramage27
Tata Institute of Fundamental Research - HECR, Mumbai, IndiaS. Banerjee, S. Dugad
Institute for Research in Fundamental Sciences (IPM), Tehran, IranH. Arfaei, H. Bakhshiansohi, S.M. Etesami28, A. Fahim29, A. Jafari, M. Khakzad,M. Mohammadi Najafabadi, S. Paktinat Mehdiabadi, B. Safarzadeh30, M. Zeinali
University College Dublin, Dublin, IrelandM. Grunewald
INFN Sezione di Bari a, Universita di Bari b, Politecnico di Bari c, Bari, ItalyM. Abbresciaa ,b, L. Barbonea,b, C. Calabriaa ,b, S.S. Chhibraa,b, A. Colaleoa, D. Creanzaa,c, N. DeFilippisa ,c, M. De Palmaa ,b, L. Fiorea, G. Iasellia ,c, G. Maggia,c, M. Maggia, B. Marangellia ,b,S. Mya,c, S. Nuzzoa ,b, N. Pacificoa, A. Pompilia,b, G. Pugliesea,c, R. Radognaa,b, G. Selvaggia ,b,L. Silvestrisa, G. Singha,b, R. Vendittia ,b, P. Verwilligena, G. Zitoa
INFN Sezione di Bologna a, Universita di Bologna b, Bologna, ItalyG. Abbiendia, A.C. Benvenutia, D. Bonacorsia ,b, S. Braibant-Giacomellia,b, L. Brigliadoria ,b,R. Campaninia,b, P. Capiluppia,b, A. Castroa ,b, F.R. Cavalloa, G. Codispotia,b, M. Cuffiania ,b,G.M. Dallavallea, F. Fabbria, A. Fanfania,b, D. Fasanellaa,b, P. Giacomellia, C. Grandia,L. Guiduccia,b, S. Marcellinia, G. Masettia, M. Meneghellia ,b, A. Montanaria, F.L. Navarriaa ,b,F. Odoricia, A. Perrottaa, F. Primaveraa ,b, A.M. Rossia,b, T. Rovellia,b, G.P. Sirolia,b, N. Tosia ,b,R. Travaglinia ,b
INFN Sezione di Catania a, Universita di Catania b, Catania, ItalyS. Albergoa ,b, G. Cappelloa, M. Chiorbolia,b, S. Costaa ,b, F. Giordanoa,2, R. Potenzaa ,b,A. Tricomia ,b, C. Tuvea ,b
INFN Sezione di Firenze a, Universita di Firenze b, Firenze, ItalyG. Barbaglia, V. Ciullia ,b, C. Civininia, R. D’Alessandroa,b, E. Focardia,b, E. Galloa, S. Gonzia ,b,V. Goria,b, P. Lenzia ,b, M. Meschinia, S. Paolettia, G. Sguazzonia, A. Tropianoa,b
INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, ItalyL. Benussi, S. Bianco, F. Fabbri, D. Piccolo
INFN Sezione di Genova a, Universita di Genova b, Genova, ItalyP. Fabbricatorea, R. Ferrettia ,b, F. Ferroa, M. Lo Veterea,b, R. Musenicha, E. Robuttia, S. Tosia ,b
INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca a, Universita di Milano-Bicocca b, Milano, ItalyA. Benagliaa, M.E. Dinardoa,b, S. Fiorendia ,b ,2, S. Gennaia, A. Ghezzia ,b, P. Govonia ,b,M.T. Lucchinia,b,2, S. Malvezzia, R.A. Manzonia ,b ,2, A. Martellia,b ,2, D. Menascea, L. Moronia,M. Paganonia,b, D. Pedrinia, S. Ragazzia,b, N. Redaellia, T. Tabarelli de Fatisa,b
INFN Sezione di Napoli a, Universita di Napoli ’Federico II’ b, Universita dellaBasilicata (Potenza) c, Universita G. Marconi (Roma) d, Napoli, ItalyS. Buontempoa, N. Cavalloa,c, F. Fabozzia,c, A.O.M. Iorioa ,b, L. Listaa, S. Meolaa,d ,2, M. Merolaa,P. Paoluccia ,2
22 A The CMS Collaboration
INFN Sezione di Padova a, Universita di Padova b, Universita di Trento (Trento) c, Padova,ItalyP. Azzia, N. Bacchettaa, M. Bellatoa, D. Biselloa,b, A. Brancaa ,b, R. Carlina,b, P. Checchiaa,T. Dorigoa, U. Dossellia, F. Fanzagoa, M. Galantia ,b ,2, F. Gasparinia,b, U. Gasparinia ,b,P. Giubilatoa,b, A. Gozzelinoa, K. Kanishcheva,c, S. Lacapraraa, I. Lazzizzeraa ,c, M. Margonia ,b,A.T. Meneguzzoa ,b, J. Pazzinia,b, N. Pozzobona,b, P. Ronchesea ,b, F. Simonettoa ,b, E. Torassaa,M. Tosia ,b, S. Vaninia,b, P. Zottoa,b, A. Zucchettaa ,b, G. Zumerlea,b
INFN Sezione di Pavia a, Universita di Pavia b, Pavia, ItalyM. Gabusia ,b, S.P. Rattia,b, C. Riccardia ,b, P. Vituloa,b
INFN Sezione di Perugia a, Universita di Perugia b, Perugia, ItalyM. Biasinia,b, G.M. Bileia, L. Fanoa,b, P. Laricciaa,b, G. Mantovania,b, M. Menichellia,A. Nappia,b†, F. Romeoa,b, A. Sahaa, A. Santocchiaa,b, A. Spieziaa ,b
INFN Sezione di Pisa a, Universita di Pisa b, Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa c, Pisa, ItalyK. Androsova,31, P. Azzurria, G. Bagliesia, J. Bernardinia, T. Boccalia, G. Broccoloa,c, R. Castaldia,M.A. Cioccia,31, R. Dell’Orsoa, F. Fioria,c, L. Foaa ,c, A. Giassia, M.T. Grippoa ,31, A. Kraana,F. Ligabuea,c, T. Lomtadzea, L. Martinia ,b, A. Messineoa ,b, C.S. Moona,32, F. Pallaa, A. Rizzia ,b,A. Savoy-Navarroa ,33, A.T. Serbana, P. Spagnoloa, P. Squillaciotia ,31, R. Tenchinia, G. Tonellia ,b,A. Venturia, P.G. Verdinia, C. Vernieria,c
INFN Sezione di Roma a, Universita di Roma b, Roma, ItalyL. Baronea ,b, F. Cavallaria, D. Del Rea ,b, M. Diemoza, M. Grassia,b, C. Jordaa, E. Longoa ,b,F. Margarolia ,b, P. Meridiania, F. Michelia,b, S. Nourbakhsha,b, G. Organtinia ,b, R. Paramattia,S. Rahatloua ,b, C. Rovellia, L. Soffia ,b
INFN Sezione di Torino a, Universita di Torino b, Universita del Piemonte Orientale (No-vara) c, Torino, ItalyN. Amapanea,b, R. Arcidiaconoa ,c, S. Argiroa,b, M. Arneodoa,c, R. Bellana,b, C. Biinoa,N. Cartigliaa, S. Casassoa ,b, M. Costaa ,b, A. Deganoa,b, N. Demariaa, C. Mariottia, S. Masellia,E. Migliorea ,b, V. Monacoa ,b, M. Musicha, M.M. Obertinoa,c, G. Ortonaa,b, L. Pachera ,b,N. Pastronea, M. Pelliccionia ,2, A. Potenzaa,b, A. Romeroa,b, M. Ruspaa ,c, R. Sacchia ,b,A. Solanoa ,b, A. Staianoa, U. Tamponia
INFN Sezione di Trieste a, Universita di Trieste b, Trieste, ItalyS. Belfortea, V. Candelisea ,b, M. Casarsaa, F. Cossuttia,2, G. Della Riccaa,b, B. Gobboa, C. LaLicataa ,b, M. Maronea ,b, D. Montaninoa ,b, A. Penzoa, A. Schizzia ,b, T. Umera ,b, A. Zanettia
Kangwon National University, Chunchon, KoreaS. Chang, T.Y. Kim, S.K. Nam
Kyungpook National University, Daegu, KoreaD.H. Kim, G.N. Kim, J.E. Kim, D.J. Kong, S. Lee, Y.D. Oh, H. Park, D.C. Son
Chonnam National University, Institute for Universe and Elementary Particles, Kwangju,KoreaJ.Y. Kim, Zero J. Kim, S. Song
Korea University, Seoul, KoreaS. Choi, D. Gyun, B. Hong, M. Jo, H. Kim, T.J. Kim, K.S. Lee, S.K. Park, Y. Roh
University of Seoul, Seoul, KoreaM. Choi, J.H. Kim, C. Park, I.C. Park, S. Park, G. Ryu
23
Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon, KoreaY. Choi, Y.K. Choi, J. Goh, M.S. Kim, E. Kwon, B. Lee, J. Lee, S. Lee, H. Seo, I. Yu
Vilnius University, Vilnius, LithuaniaI. Grigelionis, A. Juodagalvis
Centro de Investigacion y de Estudios Avanzados del IPN, Mexico City, MexicoH. Castilla-Valdez, E. De La Cruz-Burelo, I. Heredia-de La Cruz34, R. Lopez-Fernandez,J. Martınez-Ortega, A. Sanchez-Hernandez, L.M. Villasenor-Cendejas
Universidad Iberoamericana, Mexico City, MexicoS. Carrillo Moreno, F. Vazquez Valencia
Benemerita Universidad Autonoma de Puebla, Puebla, MexicoH.A. Salazar Ibarguen
Universidad Autonoma de San Luis Potosı, San Luis Potosı, MexicoE. Casimiro Linares, A. Morelos Pineda
University of Auckland, Auckland, New ZealandD. Krofcheck
University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New ZealandP.H. Butler, R. Doesburg, S. Reucroft, H. Silverwood
National Centre for Physics, Quaid-I-Azam University, Islamabad, PakistanM. Ahmad, M.I. Asghar, J. Butt, H.R. Hoorani, S. Khalid, W.A. Khan, T. Khurshid, S. Qazi,M.A. Shah, M. Shoaib
National Centre for Nuclear Research, Swierk, PolandH. Bialkowska, B. Boimska, T. Frueboes, M. Gorski, M. Kazana, K. Nawrocki, K. Romanowska-Rybinska, M. Szleper, G. Wrochna, P. Zalewski
Institute of Experimental Physics, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, PolandG. Brona, K. Bunkowski, M. Cwiok, W. Dominik, K. Doroba, A. Kalinowski, M. Konecki,J. Krolikowski, M. Misiura, W. Wolszczak
Laboratorio de Instrumentacao e Fısica Experimental de Partıculas, Lisboa, PortugalN. Almeida, P. Bargassa, C. Beirao Da Cruz E Silva, P. Faccioli, P.G. Ferreira Parracho,M. Gallinaro, F. Nguyen, J. Rodrigues Antunes, J. Seixas2, J. Varela, P. Vischia
Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, RussiaS. Afanasiev, P. Bunin, M. Gavrilenko, I. Golutvin, I. Gorbunov, A. Kamenev, V. Karjavin,V. Konoplyanikov, A. Lanev, A. Malakhov, V. Matveev, P. Moisenz, V. Palichik, V. Perelygin,S. Shmatov, N. Skatchkov, V. Smirnov, A. Zarubin
Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, Gatchina (St. Petersburg), RussiaS. Evstyukhin, V. Golovtsov, Y. Ivanov, V. Kim, P. Levchenko, V. Murzin, V. Oreshkin, I. Smirnov,V. Sulimov, L. Uvarov, S. Vavilov, A. Vorobyev, An. Vorobyev
Institute for Nuclear Research, Moscow, RussiaYu. Andreev, A. Dermenev, S. Gninenko, N. Golubev, M. Kirsanov, N. Krasnikov, A. Pashenkov,D. Tlisov, A. Toropin
Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, RussiaV. Epshteyn, V. Gavrilov, N. Lychkovskaya, V. Popov, G. Safronov, S. Semenov, A. Spiridonov,V. Stolin, E. Vlasov, A. Zhokin
24 A The CMS Collaboration
P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, RussiaV. Andreev, M. Azarkin, I. Dremin, M. Kirakosyan, A. Leonidov, G. Mesyats, S.V. Rusakov,A. Vinogradov
Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow,RussiaA. Belyaev, E. Boos, M. Dubinin7, L. Dudko, A. Ershov, A. Gribushin, V. Klyukhin, O. Kodolova,I. Lokhtin, A. Markina, S. Obraztsov, S. Petrushanko, V. Savrin, A. Snigirev
State Research Center of Russian Federation, Institute for High Energy Physics, Protvino,RussiaI. Azhgirey, I. Bayshev, S. Bitioukov, V. Kachanov, A. Kalinin, D. Konstantinov, V. Krychkine,V. Petrov, R. Ryutin, A. Sobol, L. Tourtchanovitch, S. Troshin, N. Tyurin, A. Uzunian, A. Volkov
University of Belgrade, Faculty of Physics and Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences, Belgrade,SerbiaP. Adzic35, M. Djordjevic, M. Ekmedzic, J. Milosevic
Centro de Investigaciones Energeticas Medioambientales y Tecnologicas (CIEMAT),Madrid, SpainM. Aguilar-Benitez, J. Alcaraz Maestre, C. Battilana, E. Calvo, M. Cerrada, M. Chamizo Llatas2,N. Colino, B. De La Cruz, A. Delgado Peris, D. Domınguez Vazquez, C. Fernandez Bedoya,J.P. Fernandez Ramos, A. Ferrando, J. Flix, M.C. Fouz, P. Garcia-Abia, O. Gonzalez Lopez,S. Goy Lopez, J.M. Hernandez, M.I. Josa, G. Merino, E. Navarro De Martino, J. Puerta Pelayo,A. Quintario Olmeda, I. Redondo, L. Romero, M.S. Soares, C. Willmott
Universidad Autonoma de Madrid, Madrid, SpainC. Albajar, J.F. de Troconiz
Universidad de Oviedo, Oviedo, SpainH. Brun, J. Cuevas, J. Fernandez Menendez, S. Folgueras, I. Gonzalez Caballero, L. LloretIglesias
Instituto de Fısica de Cantabria (IFCA), CSIC-Universidad de Cantabria, Santander, SpainJ.A. Brochero Cifuentes, I.J. Cabrillo, A. Calderon, S.H. Chuang, J. Duarte Campderros,M. Fernandez, G. Gomez, J. Gonzalez Sanchez, A. Graziano, A. Lopez Virto, J. Marco,R. Marco, C. Martinez Rivero, F. Matorras, F.J. Munoz Sanchez, J. Piedra Gomez, T. Rodrigo,A.Y. Rodrıguez-Marrero, A. Ruiz-Jimeno, L. Scodellaro, I. Vila, R. Vilar Cortabitarte
CERN, European Organization for Nuclear Research, Geneva, SwitzerlandD. Abbaneo, E. Auffray, G. Auzinger, M. Bachtis, P. Baillon, A.H. Ball, D. Barney, J. Bendavid,J.F. Benitez, C. Bernet8, G. Bianchi, P. Bloch, A. Bocci, A. Bonato, O. Bondu, C. Botta, H. Breuker,T. Camporesi, G. Cerminara, T. Christiansen, J.A. Coarasa Perez, S. Colafranceschi36,M. D’Alfonso, D. d’Enterria, A. Dabrowski, A. David, F. De Guio, A. De Roeck, S. De Visscher,S. Di Guida, M. Dobson, N. Dupont-Sagorin, A. Elliott-Peisert, J. Eugster, G. Franzoni, W. Funk,M. Giffels, D. Gigi, K. Gill, D. Giordano, M. Girone, M. Giunta, F. Glege, R. Gomez-ReinoGarrido, S. Gowdy, R. Guida, J. Hammer, M. Hansen, P. Harris, C. Hartl, A. Hinzmann,V. Innocente, P. Janot, E. Karavakis, K. Kousouris, K. Krajczar, P. Lecoq, Y.-J. Lee, C. Lourenco,N. Magini, L. Malgeri, M. Mannelli, L. Masetti, F. Meijers, S. Mersi, E. Meschi, M. Mulders,P. Musella, L. Orsini, E. Palencia Cortezon, E. Perez, L. Perrozzi, A. Petrilli, G. Petrucciani,A. Pfeiffer, M. Pierini, M. Pimia, D. Piparo, M. Plagge, L. Quertenmont, A. Racz, W. Reece,G. Rolandi37, M. Rovere, H. Sakulin, F. Santanastasio, C. Schafer, C. Schwick, S. Sekmen,
25
A. Sharma, P. Siegrist, P. Silva, M. Simon, P. Sphicas38, D. Spiga, J. Steggemann, B. Stieger,M. Stoye, A. Tsirou, G.I. Veres22, J.R. Vlimant, H.K. Wohri, W.D. Zeuner
Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, SwitzerlandW. Bertl, K. Deiters, W. Erdmann, K. Gabathuler, R. Horisberger, Q. Ingram, H.C. Kaestli,S. Konig, D. Kotlinski, U. Langenegger, D. Renker, T. Rohe
Institute for Particle Physics, ETH Zurich, Zurich, SwitzerlandF. Bachmair, L. Bani, L. Bianchini, P. Bortignon, M.A. Buchmann, B. Casal, N. Chanon,A. Deisher, G. Dissertori, M. Dittmar, M. Donega, M. Dunser, P. Eller, K. Freudenreich,C. Grab, D. Hits, P. Lecomte, W. Lustermann, B. Mangano, A.C. Marini, P. Martinez Ruiz delArbol, D. Meister, N. Mohr, F. Moortgat, C. Nageli39, P. Nef, F. Nessi-Tedaldi, F. Pandolfi,L. Pape, F. Pauss, M. Peruzzi, M. Quittnat, F.J. Ronga, M. Rossini, L. Sala, A.K. Sanchez,A. Starodumov40, M. Takahashi, L. Tauscher†, K. Theofilatos, D. Treille, R. Wallny, H.A. Weber
Universitat Zurich, Zurich, SwitzerlandC. Amsler41, V. Chiochia, A. De Cosa, C. Favaro, M. Ivova Rikova, B. Kilminster, B. MillanMejias, J. Ngadiuba, P. Robmann, H. Snoek, S. Taroni, M. Verzetti, Y. Yang
National Central University, Chung-Li, TaiwanM. Cardaci, K.H. Chen, C. Ferro, C.M. Kuo, S.W. Li, W. Lin, Y.J. Lu, R. Volpe, S.S. Yu
National Taiwan University (NTU), Taipei, TaiwanP. Bartalini, P. Chang, Y.H. Chang, Y.W. Chang, Y. Chao, K.F. Chen, C. Dietz, U. Grundler,W.-S. Hou, Y. Hsiung, K.Y. Kao, Y.J. Lei, Y.F. Liu, R.-S. Lu, D. Majumder, E. Petrakou, X. Shi,J.G. Shiu, Y.M. Tzeng, M. Wang
Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, ThailandB. Asavapibhop, N. Suwonjandee
Cukurova University, Adana, TurkeyA. Adiguzel, M.N. Bakirci42, S. Cerci43, C. Dozen, I. Dumanoglu, E. Eskut, S. Girgis,G. Gokbulut, E. Gurpinar, I. Hos, E.E. Kangal, A. Kayis Topaksu, G. Onengut44, K. Ozdemir,S. Ozturk42, A. Polatoz, K. Sogut45, D. Sunar Cerci43, B. Tali43, H. Topakli42, M. Vergili
Middle East Technical University, Physics Department, Ankara, TurkeyI.V. Akin, T. Aliev, B. Bilin, S. Bilmis, M. Deniz, H. Gamsizkan, A.M. Guler, G. Karapinar46,K. Ocalan, A. Ozpineci, M. Serin, R. Sever, U.E. Surat, M. Yalvac, M. Zeyrek
Bogazici University, Istanbul, TurkeyE. Gulmez, B. Isildak47, M. Kaya48, O. Kaya48, S. Ozkorucuklu49, N. Sonmez50
Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, TurkeyH. Bahtiyar51, E. Barlas, K. Cankocak, Y.O. Gunaydin52, F.I. Vardarlı, M. Yucel
National Scientific Center, Kharkov Institute of Physics and Technology, Kharkov, UkraineL. Levchuk, P. Sorokin
University of Bristol, Bristol, United KingdomJ.J. Brooke, E. Clement, D. Cussans, H. Flacher, R. Frazier, J. Goldstein, M. Grimes, G.P. Heath,H.F. Heath, J. Jacob, L. Kreczko, C. Lucas, Z. Meng, S. Metson, D.M. Newbold53, K. Nirunpong,S. Paramesvaran, A. Poll, S. Senkin, V.J. Smith, T. Williams
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United KingdomK.W. Bell, A. Belyaev54, C. Brew, R.M. Brown, D.J.A. Cockerill, J.A. Coughlan, K. Harder,
26 A The CMS Collaboration
S. Harper, J. Ilic, E. Olaiya, D. Petyt, B.C. Radburn-Smith, C.H. Shepherd-Themistocleous,A. Thea, I.R. Tomalin, W.J. Womersley, S.D. Worm
Imperial College, London, United KingdomR. Bainbridge, O. Buchmuller, D. Burton, D. Colling, N. Cripps, M. Cutajar, P. Dauncey,G. Davies, M. Della Negra, W. Ferguson, J. Fulcher, D. Futyan, A. Gilbert, A. Guneratne Bryer,G. Hall, Z. Hatherell, J. Hays, G. Iles, M. Jarvis, G. Karapostoli, M. Kenzie, R. Lane, R. Lucas53,L. Lyons, A.-M. Magnan, J. Marrouche, B. Mathias, R. Nandi, J. Nash, A. Nikitenko40, J. Pela,M. Pesaresi, K. Petridis, M. Pioppi55, D.M. Raymond, S. Rogerson, A. Rose, C. Seez, P. Sharp†,A. Sparrow, A. Tapper, M. Vazquez Acosta, T. Virdee, S. Wakefield, N. Wardle
Brunel University, Uxbridge, United KingdomM. Chadwick, J.E. Cole, P.R. Hobson, A. Khan, P. Kyberd, D. Leggat, D. Leslie, W. Martin,I.D. Reid, P. Symonds, L. Teodorescu, M. Turner
Baylor University, Waco, USAJ. Dittmann, K. Hatakeyama, A. Kasmi, H. Liu, T. Scarborough
The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, USAO. Charaf, S.I. Cooper, C. Henderson, P. Rumerio
Boston University, Boston, USAA. Avetisyan, T. Bose, C. Fantasia, A. Heister, P. Lawson, D. Lazic, J. Rohlf, D. Sperka, J. St. John,L. Sulak
Brown University, Providence, USAJ. Alimena, S. Bhattacharya, G. Christopher, D. Cutts, Z. Demiragli, A. Ferapontov,A. Garabedian, U. Heintz, S. Jabeen, G. Kukartsev, E. Laird, G. Landsberg, M. Luk, M. Narain,M. Segala, T. Sinthuprasith, T. Speer
University of California, Davis, Davis, USAR. Breedon, G. Breto, M. Calderon De La Barca Sanchez, S. Chauhan, M. Chertok, J. Conway,R. Conway, P.T. Cox, R. Erbacher, M. Gardner, W. Ko, A. Kopecky, R. Lander, T. Miceli,D. Pellett, J. Pilot, F. Ricci-Tam, B. Rutherford, M. Searle, S. Shalhout, J. Smith, M. Squires,M. Tripathi, S. Wilbur, R. Yohay
University of California, Los Angeles, USAV. Andreev, D. Cline, R. Cousins, S. Erhan, P. Everaerts, C. Farrell, M. Felcini, J. Hauser,M. Ignatenko, C. Jarvis, G. Rakness, P. Schlein†, E. Takasugi, P. Traczyk, V. Valuev, M. Weber
University of California, Riverside, Riverside, USAJ. Babb, R. Clare, J. Ellison, J.W. Gary, G. Hanson, J. Heilman, P. Jandir, F. Lacroix, H. Liu,O.R. Long, A. Luthra, M. Malberti, H. Nguyen, A. Shrinivas, J. Sturdy, S. Sumowidagdo,R. Wilken, S. Wimpenny
University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, USAW. Andrews, J.G. Branson, G.B. Cerati, S. Cittolin, R.T. D’Agnolo, D. Evans, A. Holzner,R. Kelley, M. Lebourgeois, J. Letts, I. Macneill, S. Padhi, C. Palmer, M. Pieri, M. Sani, V. Sharma,S. Simon, E. Sudano, M. Tadel, Y. Tu, A. Vartak, S. Wasserbaech56, F. Wurthwein, A. Yagil, J. Yoo
University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, USAD. Barge, C. Campagnari, T. Danielson, K. Flowers, P. Geffert, C. George, F. Golf, J. Incandela,C. Justus, D. Kovalskyi, V. Krutelyov, R. Magana Villalba, N. Mccoll, V. Pavlunin, J. Richman,R. Rossin, D. Stuart, W. To, C. West
27
California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, USAA. Apresyan, A. Bornheim, J. Bunn, Y. Chen, E. Di Marco, J. Duarte, D. Kcira, Y. Ma, A. Mott,H.B. Newman, C. Pena, C. Rogan, M. Spiropulu, V. Timciuc, R. Wilkinson, S. Xie, R.Y. Zhu
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USAV. Azzolini, A. Calamba, R. Carroll, T. Ferguson, Y. Iiyama, D.W. Jang, M. Paulini, J. Russ,H. Vogel, I. Vorobiev
University of Colorado at Boulder, Boulder, USAJ.P. Cumalat, B.R. Drell, W.T. Ford, A. Gaz, E. Luiggi Lopez, U. Nauenberg, J.G. Smith,K. Stenson, K.A. Ulmer, S.R. Wagner
Cornell University, Ithaca, USAJ. Alexander, A. Chatterjee, N. Eggert, L.K. Gibbons, W. Hopkins, A. Khukhunaishvili, B. Kreis,N. Mirman, G. Nicolas Kaufman, J.R. Patterson, A. Ryd, E. Salvati, W. Sun, W.D. Teo, J. Thom,J. Thompson, J. Tucker, Y. Weng, L. Winstrom, P. Wittich
Fairfield University, Fairfield, USAD. Winn
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, USAS. Abdullin, M. Albrow, J. Anderson, G. Apollinari, L.A.T. Bauerdick, A. Beretvas, J. Berryhill,P.C. Bhat, K. Burkett, J.N. Butler, V. Chetluru, H.W.K. Cheung, F. Chlebana, S. Cihangir,V.D. Elvira, I. Fisk, J. Freeman, Y. Gao, E. Gottschalk, L. Gray, D. Green, O. Gutsche, D. Hare,R.M. Harris, J. Hirschauer, B. Hooberman, S. Jindariani, M. Johnson, U. Joshi, K. Kaadze,B. Klima, S. Kunori, S. Kwan, J. Linacre, D. Lincoln, R. Lipton, J. Lykken, K. Maeshima,J.M. Marraffino, V.I. Martinez Outschoorn, S. Maruyama, D. Mason, P. McBride, K. Mishra,S. Mrenna, Y. Musienko57, C. Newman-Holmes, V. O’Dell, O. Prokofyev, N. Ratnikova,E. Sexton-Kennedy, S. Sharma, W.J. Spalding, L. Spiegel, L. Taylor, S. Tkaczyk, N.V. Tran,L. Uplegger, E.W. Vaandering, R. Vidal, J. Whitmore, W. Wu, F. Yang, J.C. Yun
University of Florida, Gainesville, USAD. Acosta, P. Avery, D. Bourilkov, T. Cheng, S. Das, M. De Gruttola, G.P. Di Giovanni,D. Dobur, A. Drozdetskiy, R.D. Field, M. Fisher, Y. Fu, I.K. Furic, J. Hugon, B. Kim,J. Konigsberg, A. Korytov, A. Kropivnitskaya, T. Kypreos, J.F. Low, K. Matchev, P. Milenovic58,G. Mitselmakher, L. Muniz, A. Rinkevicius, N. Skhirtladze, M. Snowball, J. Yelton, M. Zakaria
Florida International University, Miami, USAV. Gaultney, S. Hewamanage, S. Linn, P. Markowitz, G. Martinez, J.L. Rodriguez
Florida State University, Tallahassee, USAT. Adams, A. Askew, J. Bochenek, J. Chen, B. Diamond, J. Haas, S. Hagopian, V. Hagopian,K.F. Johnson, H. Prosper, V. Veeraraghavan, M. Weinberg
Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, USAM.M. Baarmand, B. Dorney, M. Hohlmann, H. Kalakhety, F. Yumiceva
University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC), Chicago, USAM.R. Adams, L. Apanasevich, V.E. Bazterra, R.R. Betts, I. Bucinskaite, J. Callner, R. Cavanaugh,O. Evdokimov, L. Gauthier, C.E. Gerber, D.J. Hofman, S. Khalatyan, P. Kurt, D.H. Moon,C. O’Brien, C. Silkworth, D. Strom, P. Turner, N. Varelas
The University of Iowa, Iowa City, USAU. Akgun, E.A. Albayrak51, B. Bilki59, W. Clarida, K. Dilsiz, F. Duru, J.-P. Merlo,
28 A The CMS Collaboration
H. Mermerkaya60, A. Mestvirishvili, A. Moeller, J. Nachtman, H. Ogul, Y. Onel, F. Ozok51,S. Sen, P. Tan, E. Tiras, J. Wetzel, T. Yetkin61, K. Yi
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USAB.A. Barnett, B. Blumenfeld, S. Bolognesi, A.V. Gritsan, P. Maksimovic, C. Martin, M. Swartz,A. Whitbeck
The University of Kansas, Lawrence, USAP. Baringer, A. Bean, G. Benelli, R.P. Kenny III, M. Murray, D. Noonan, S. Sanders, J. Sekaric,R. Stringer, J.S. Wood
Kansas State University, Manhattan, USAA.F. Barfuss, I. Chakaberia, A. Ivanov, S. Khalil, M. Makouski, Y. Maravin, L.K. Saini,S. Shrestha, I. Svintradze
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USAJ. Gronberg, D. Lange, F. Rebassoo, D. Wright
University of Maryland, College Park, USAA. Baden, B. Calvert, S.C. Eno, J.A. Gomez, N.J. Hadley, R.G. Kellogg, T. Kolberg, Y. Lu,M. Marionneau, A.C. Mignerey, K. Pedro, A. Skuja, J. Temple, M.B. Tonjes, S.C. Tonwar
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USAA. Apyan, G. Bauer, W. Busza, I.A. Cali, M. Chan, L. Di Matteo, V. Dutta, G. Gomez Ceballos,M. Goncharov, D. Gulhan, Y. Kim, M. Klute, Y.S. Lai, A. Levin, P.D. Luckey, T. Ma, S. Nahn,C. Paus, D. Ralph, C. Roland, G. Roland, G.S.F. Stephans, F. Stockli, K. Sumorok, D. Velicanu,J. Veverka, R. Wolf, B. Wyslouch, M. Yang, Y. Yilmaz, A.S. Yoon, M. Zanetti, V. Zhukova
University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USAB. Dahmes, A. De Benedetti, A. Gude, S.C. Kao, K. Klapoetke, Y. Kubota, J. Mans, N. Pastika,R. Rusack, A. Singovsky, N. Tambe, J. Turkewitz
University of Mississippi, Oxford, USAJ.G. Acosta, L.M. Cremaldi, R. Kroeger, S. Oliveros, L. Perera, R. Rahmat, D.A. Sanders,D. Summers
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, USAE. Avdeeva, K. Bloom, S. Bose, D.R. Claes, A. Dominguez, R. Gonzalez Suarez, J. Keller,I. Kravchenko, J. Lazo-Flores, S. Malik, F. Meier, G.R. Snow
State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, USAJ. Dolen, A. Godshalk, I. Iashvili, S. Jain, A. Kharchilava, A. Kumar, S. Rappoccio, Z. Wan
Northeastern University, Boston, USAG. Alverson, E. Barberis, D. Baumgartel, M. Chasco, J. Haley, A. Massironi, D. Nash, T. Orimoto,D. Trocino, D. Wood, J. Zhang
Northwestern University, Evanston, USAA. Anastassov, K.A. Hahn, A. Kubik, L. Lusito, N. Mucia, N. Odell, B. Pollack, A. Pozdnyakov,M. Schmitt, S. Stoynev, K. Sung, M. Velasco, S. Won
University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, USAD. Berry, A. Brinkerhoff, K.M. Chan, M. Hildreth, C. Jessop, D.J. Karmgard, J. Kolb, K. Lannon,W. Luo, S. Lynch, N. Marinelli, D.M. Morse, T. Pearson, M. Planer, R. Ruchti, J. Slaunwhite,N. Valls, M. Wayne, M. Wolf
29
The Ohio State University, Columbus, USAL. Antonelli, B. Bylsma, L.S. Durkin, S. Flowers, C. Hill, R. Hughes, K. Kotov, T.Y. Ling,D. Puigh, M. Rodenburg, G. Smith, C. Vuosalo, B.L. Winer, H. Wolfe, H.W. Wulsin
Princeton University, Princeton, USAE. Berry, P. Elmer, V. Halyo, P. Hebda, J. Hegeman, A. Hunt, P. Jindal, S.A. Koay, P. Lujan,D. Marlow, T. Medvedeva, M. Mooney, J. Olsen, P. Piroue, X. Quan, A. Raval, H. Saka,D. Stickland, C. Tully, J.S. Werner, S.C. Zenz, A. Zuranski
University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez, USAE. Brownson, A. Lopez, H. Mendez, J.E. Ramirez Vargas
Purdue University, West Lafayette, USAE. Alagoz, D. Benedetti, G. Bolla, D. Bortoletto, M. De Mattia, A. Everett, Z. Hu, M. Jones,K. Jung, M. Kress, N. Leonardo, D. Lopes Pegna, V. Maroussov, P. Merkel, D.H. Miller,N. Neumeister, I. Shipsey, D. Silvers, A. Svyatkovskiy, F. Wang, W. Xie, L. Xu, H.D. Yoo,J. Zablocki, Y. Zheng
Purdue University Calumet, Hammond, USAN. Parashar
Rice University, Houston, USAA. Adair, B. Akgun, K.M. Ecklund, F.J.M. Geurts, W. Li, B. Michlin, B.P. Padley, R. Redjimi,J. Roberts, J. Zabel
University of Rochester, Rochester, USAB. Betchart, A. Bodek, R. Covarelli, P. de Barbaro, R. Demina, Y. Eshaq, T. Ferbel, A. Garcia-Bellido, P. Goldenzweig, J. Han, A. Harel, D.C. Miner, G. Petrillo, D. Vishnevskiy, M. Zielinski
The Rockefeller University, New York, USAA. Bhatti, R. Ciesielski, L. Demortier, K. Goulianos, G. Lungu, S. Malik, C. Mesropian
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, USAS. Arora, A. Barker, J.P. Chou, C. Contreras-Campana, E. Contreras-Campana, D. Duggan,D. Ferencek, Y. Gershtein, R. Gray, E. Halkiadakis, D. Hidas, A. Lath, S. Panwalkar, M. Park,R. Patel, V. Rekovic, J. Robles, S. Salur, S. Schnetzer, C. Seitz, S. Somalwar, R. Stone, S. Thomas,P. Thomassen, M. Walker
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USAK. Rose, S. Spanier, Z.C. Yang, A. York
Texas A&M University, College Station, USAO. Bouhali62, R. Eusebi, W. Flanagan, J. Gilmore, T. Kamon63, V. Khotilovich, R. Montalvo,I. Osipenkov, Y. Pakhotin, A. Perloff, J. Roe, A. Safonov, T. Sakuma, I. Suarez, A. Tatarinov,D. Toback
Texas Tech University, Lubbock, USAN. Akchurin, C. Cowden, J. Damgov, C. Dragoiu, P.R. Dudero, K. Kovitanggoon, S.W. Lee,T. Libeiro, I. Volobouev
Vanderbilt University, Nashville, USAE. Appelt, A.G. Delannoy, S. Greene, A. Gurrola, W. Johns, C. Maguire, Y. Mao, A. Melo,M. Sharma, P. Sheldon, B. Snook, S. Tuo, J. Velkovska
30 A The CMS Collaboration
University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USAM.W. Arenton, S. Boutle, B. Cox, B. Francis, J. Goodell, R. Hirosky, A. Ledovskoy, C. Lin, C. Neu,J. Wood
Wayne State University, Detroit, USAS. Gollapinni, R. Harr, P.E. Karchin, C. Kottachchi Kankanamge Don, P. Lamichhane,A. Sakharov
University of Wisconsin, Madison, USAD.A. Belknap, L. Borrello, D. Carlsmith, M. Cepeda, S. Dasu, S. Duric, E. Friis, M. Grothe,R. Hall-Wilton, M. Herndon, A. Herve, P. Klabbers, J. Klukas, A. Lanaro, R. Loveless,A. Mohapatra, I. Ojalvo, T. Perry, G.A. Pierro, G. Polese, I. Ross, T. Sarangi, A. Savin,W.H. Smith, J. Swanson
†: Deceased1: Also at Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria2: Also at CERN, European Organization for Nuclear Research, Geneva, Switzerland3: Also at Institut Pluridisciplinaire Hubert Curien, Universite de Strasbourg, Universite deHaute Alsace Mulhouse, CNRS/IN2P3, Strasbourg, France4: Also at National Institute of Chemical Physics and Biophysics, Tallinn, Estonia5: Also at Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University,Moscow, Russia6: Also at Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, Brazil7: Also at California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, USA8: Also at Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, Ecole Polytechnique, IN2P3-CNRS, Palaiseau, France9: Also at Zewail City of Science and Technology, Zewail, Egypt10: Also at Suez Canal University, Suez, Egypt11: Also at Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt12: Also at Fayoum University, El-Fayoum, Egypt13: Also at British University in Egypt, Cairo, Egypt14: Now at Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt15: Also at National Centre for Nuclear Research, Swierk, Poland16: Also at Universite de Haute Alsace, Mulhouse, France17: Also at Universidad de Antioquia, Medellin, Colombia18: Also at Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia19: Also at Brandenburg University of Technology, Cottbus, Germany20: Also at The University of Kansas, Lawrence, USA21: Also at Institute of Nuclear Research ATOMKI, Debrecen, Hungary22: Also at Eotvos Lorand University, Budapest, Hungary23: Also at Tata Institute of Fundamental Research - EHEP, Mumbai, India24: Also at Tata Institute of Fundamental Research - HECR, Mumbai, India25: Now at King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia26: Also at University of Visva-Bharati, Santiniketan, India27: Also at University of Ruhuna, Matara, Sri Lanka28: Also at Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran29: Also at Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran30: Also at Plasma Physics Research Center, Science and Research Branch, Islamic AzadUniversity, Tehran, Iran31: Also at Universita degli Studi di Siena, Siena, Italy32: Also at Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) - IN2P3, Paris, France33: Also at Purdue University, West Lafayette, USA
31
34: Also at Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolas de Hidalgo, Morelia, Mexico35: Also at Faculty of Physics, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia36: Also at Facolta Ingegneria, Universita di Roma, Roma, Italy37: Also at Scuola Normale e Sezione dell’INFN, Pisa, Italy38: Also at University of Athens, Athens, Greece39: Also at Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland40: Also at Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia41: Also at Albert Einstein Center for Fundamental Physics, Bern, Switzerland42: Also at Gaziosmanpasa University, Tokat, Turkey43: Also at Adiyaman University, Adiyaman, Turkey44: Also at Cag University, Mersin, Turkey45: Also at Mersin University, Mersin, Turkey46: Also at Izmir Institute of Technology, Izmir, Turkey47: Also at Ozyegin University, Istanbul, Turkey48: Also at Kafkas University, Kars, Turkey49: Also at Suleyman Demirel University, Isparta, Turkey50: Also at Ege University, Izmir, Turkey51: Also at Mimar Sinan University, Istanbul, Istanbul, Turkey52: Also at Kahramanmaras Sutcu Imam University, Kahramanmaras, Turkey53: Also at Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom54: Also at School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Southampton, Southampton,United Kingdom55: Also at INFN Sezione di Perugia; Universita di Perugia, Perugia, Italy56: Also at Utah Valley University, Orem, USA57: Also at Institute for Nuclear Research, Moscow, Russia58: Also at University of Belgrade, Faculty of Physics and Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences,Belgrade, Serbia59: Also at Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, USA60: Also at Erzincan University, Erzincan, Turkey61: Also at Yildiz Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey62: Also at Texas A&M University at Qatar, Doha, Qatar63: Also at Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea
![Page 1: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
![Page 2: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
![Page 3: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
![Page 4: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
![Page 5: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
![Page 6: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
![Page 7: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
![Page 8: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
![Page 9: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
![Page 10: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
![Page 11: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
![Page 12: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
![Page 13: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
![Page 14: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
![Page 15: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
![Page 16: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
![Page 17: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
![Page 18: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
![Page 19: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
![Page 20: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
![Page 21: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
![Page 22: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
![Page 23: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
![Page 24: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
![Page 25: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
![Page 26: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
![Page 27: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
![Page 28: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
![Page 29: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
![Page 30: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
![Page 31: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
![Page 32: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
![Page 33: The CMS Collaboration arXiv:1311.1799v3 [hep-ex] 14 Feb 2014 · hadron calorimeter (HCAL) that consists of brass layers and scintillator sampling calorimeters. Muons are measured](https://reader034.documents.pub/reader034/viewer/2022042208/5eab0bc27ec99f62775dc11c/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
